Ferguson Mo Conspiracy Theory

20Aug

Here’s a Black resident of Ferguson, Missouri, who claims that the federal government has imported phoney protesters into Ferguson to fan the flames and help precipitate more violence by demonstrators and more counter-violence by the police and National Guard.

If this conspiracy theory is correct, more of Ferguson and perhaps parts of St. Louis are likely to be burned to ashes in the near future–and not because of the locals. On the other hand, if the conspiracy theory is false and evidence of overreaction, we may see some semblance of lasting calm restored to Ferguson within the next week.

I don’t know if this conspiracy theory is true or false. But we live in a time when it could be true that our own government–despite claims to be searching for a solution to the conflict in Ferguson–is actually seeking make matters worse, more violent, more deadly and more widespread. How much longer can Ferguson burn before we also see fires in Chicago, Atlanta, Baltimore or LA?

20 responses to “Ferguson Mo Conspiracy Theory”

Roger

August 21, 2014 at 12:54 AM

If the conspiracy theory of this “black resident” is roughly correct, and it could be, it would not be “the government” who’s importing phony protesters.

Instead, it would be a criminal faction abusing their positions of trust within the government. Since they would be acting unlawfully, they would not be acting in the capacity of government employees, but rather in their personal capacities.

If, on the other hand, this conspiracy theory is wrong, there could still be provocateurs involved.

They could be provocateurs imported into Ferguson by one of America’s enemies, foreign or domestic, acting independently of the government, and working to overthrow the People’s constitutional rule of law by violent revolution.

how did the braindeadgoy in the multicultural “JEW” worshipping MOSHPIT come to have
a “government” of Psychopathic TERRORIST “JEWS” who print the currency & Own the media
and Operate a crackhouse {KOSHER} called CONgress ?

Government, bankers and Monopoly Industrialists gin-up these ‘riots’, the same way as with ‘wars’ and for the same reasons. To force borrowing, when Terminal Debt Saturation sets in, assets have to be destroyed to force their replacement through … resumption of borrowing!

Consider the fact that the last big civil unrest brouhaha was also in “middle America” at the Bundy Ranch. See, political polarization is maxed in the coastal regions. They’re pretty much “in the bag”. Middle America is the real test. How many folks still talk some common sense in Middle America? Black, white, city folk, country folk, we still hear some good old fashioned common sense, “don’t back down, but don’t take the bait”, is what we are hearing and so the “destroy America” agenda knows it’s work is still not done in destroying the foundations. I do not doubt what this young man says is true. These citizens are being provoked, and I think even the police departments are being set up, pitted against the people, causing both (citizens and police) to be paranoid and distrustful of one another just like the “black/white” narrative. I am white. The black man is not my enemy. I am not the black man’s enemy. Most people take their measure of individuals on a case-by-case basis. The “mob mentality” however, has proven to over-ride this, so provoking suspicion serves the agenda of those who wish to incite chaos and unravel order. Every time one of these incidents erupts, it is taking the temperature, measuring how much more work needs to be done to so divide the nation, pitting American brother against American brother, neighbor against neighbor, until this once-solid nation is ready to crumble in upon itself.

There are a couple of differences between the Bundy standoff and the Ferguson crisis:

1) Bundy and his supporters were primarily White; Ferguson demonstrators are primarily Black.

2) Bundy looked like a cross between John Wayne and the Marlboro Man and was a great media icon; Ferguson demonstrators (except for being poor) look like a cross between Chris Rock and Al Sharpton and look more like neighborhood drug dealers (they’re losing the media war).

3) Bundy’s supporters included the militia and virtually all of his supporters were ARMED with RIFLES; most Ferguson demonstrators are not armed and those who are, are only packing handguns.

Tthe bundy ranch supporters didn’t get this ‘ferguson’ type of treatment from over 200 armed LEOs and federal agents. Both the bundy supporters and the oppressed blacks in Ferguson have a gripe, but you can see the difference in the way both situations were handled.

The Bundy supporters were stopping an alleged injustice from occurring in the moment, while these black hooligans are just simply off the reservation destroying their own neighborhoods to protest something that none of them really care about (otherwise, they’d be up in Chicago, New York, and St. Louis protesting nightly against the black on black murders and drive by shootings).

If they came together in an organized fashion, made a plan that wasn’t so jungleized, and made a firm and resolute stand without preempting violence against their aggressors, it would be a different story.

As it stands now, both the black protesters AND the militant commie pigs are in the wrong. Its hard to have sympathy for either side at this point.

pop de adam

August 23, 2014 at 10:46 PM

The income tax was delcared in effect in 1914? Women’s sufferage became the law in 1920? All laws previous to 1920 are invalidated as 50% of all votes were invalidated. All laws preceding womens right to vote are invalid. They didn’t vote.

Lawrence Cameron

August 21, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Hi Al, just a quick letter to inquire about the silver derivatives case. Haven’t seen any results from the court’s ruling thereto nor has the spot price for silver shown anything but a downward slide (rather disheartening considering that’s the few resources I possess are in silver). Finishing up reading “Loose Cannons of Common Law”. I’ve taken my time processing as this has been one component lacking in my comprehension, to date. I should probably call or write Joe and Gary in Soldotna but I think they are both disappointed in my last posting to them. Fear makes a man do strange things, exactly as I have. Well, thanks for taking the time and patience to post your observations. Thought for certain no one loved me any longer. Peace and safety to you and yours.

“They rule from the shadows, you see…
In secret, for thousands of years.”

—William Cooper

Toland

August 22, 2014 at 12:17 AM

@Roger >> Since they would be acting unlawfully, they would not be acting in the capacity of government employees, but rather in their personal capacities. <<

This resembles the "stripping doctrine", though it's a bit different.

As I understand it, the "stripping doctrine" says a government employee who abuses his position by acting illegally can be sued in his individual capacity.

Whereas, what you're saying could be re-phrased as…

A government employee who acts illegally is necessarily acting beyond (indeed, contrary to) the express terms of his employment and is therefore acting under his own responsibility, in his individual capacity and NOT as a member of the government.

I’ve heard your version before, though I’d have to look up the official name of the doctrine.

It appears to be bullish prop for the USDOLLAR index and the S&P 500 index which continue to exhibit continued uptrends amidst diminishing momentum. This event may be a forerunner of the way inner-city USA inc. will look like when the checks in the mail only buy 30% of what they once did, coming your city soon!

Today, the term “Conspiracy Theory” does not mean a theory about a conspiracy. It, like racist, homophobia, and anti-Semitic, means “a crazy idea that mean people hold”. The official story of 9/11 is a theory of how 19 hijackers conspired with a man in a cave on the other side of the planet to take over airliners and crash them into American buildings. But if you called it a conspiracy theory, you will get dumbfounded looks. The general public will say it can’t be a conspiracy theory because it is true.

The manufactured consensus is that anyone suggesting an idea that the government has not endorsed is not only stupid but they are also crazy. This way, the general public does not have to waste their time trying to think for themselves.

We can try to recapture the term or we can use a different term that has not been corrupted yet. I suggest using “alternative analysis” instead of “conspiracy theory”.